I’m looking forward to

[Coug90]

Fauci lied about masks because of fear the hospitals would run out of PPE. He lied about the vaccine level because he didn't think the American people could handle the truth about the level of vaccination needed to reach herd immunity, and because no one knew how effective the vaccines would be. If the vaccines were say That's not his role. He's not an elected official.

And although this article leads with Rubio's criticism (cause tweetstorms are cool I guess), it's the substance of the article that's important. Polling somehow is science? Really? Ultimately, Fauci made the choice to undermine his own credibility. Why should anyone believe him?

Eh, you really didn’t answer my question. There’s a reason law enforcement looks at motive as an early factor in an investigation. Usually where there’s no motive there’s no action.
What motive does Fauci have to “undermine himself”. What does he gain? We aren’t talking something big here either we are talking an estimated moving target that he moved what, 10%...based on new information? His change in temperature about masking up is easily explainable and had everything to do with availability of PPE for front line healthcare workers. Whether that’s the right strategy or not is certainly a matter of opinion, but it’s not hard to wrap your head around that reasoning.
You provided an example which cited Rubio as calling Fauci a liar. What credibility does Rubio have? He mocked the virus early and often, and was first in line to get vaccinated. He has zero credibility. FWIW I would have voted for Rubio. I considered him the best of all candidates in the primary’s. His motive for getting this message out is pretty clear and is all about gathering support for his political future.

 

[95coug]

I could see an argument there, but the spread in areas that had people inclined to be more compliant (i.e., blue states, since you have put this largely in political terms) has been as bad or worse than red states. I also think being indoors around other people, masks or not, is the primary issue here, which cuts against that argument. (I'm not saying masks don't work ... instead saying that extended indoor exposure, even with a face covering, seems to be the primary way this being spread, since most face coverings won't actually prevent the virus from being inhaled ... people aren't out there wearing KN95s or better routinely or wearing them properly.)

Therein lies the problem.

Just like the herd immunity issue, mask wearing requires a critical mass to be truly effective. And it requires not just wearing, but properly wearing. I guarantee that wherever you live, you can go down to your nearest Costco and walk in the front door...and before you get to the back you'll see a half dozen people with it under their nose and a couple more that have pulled it under their chin. Then there's the people who pull it down to talk. I saw a woman the other day who took it off so she could sneeze.

Consider also the basic function of the mask - to trap exhaled particles at the source. No mask is going to keep virus particles out. They afford very little protection to the wearer. The idea is that the wearer's exhalations are reduced, thereby reducing the amount of virus-laden aerosol in the environment. So, it takes very few infected people not wearing masks - or wearing them improperly - to maintain spread among a population. And red state/blue state, red county/blue county be damned....there are people everywhere who refuse to wear them or don't wear them right.

Protection from any contaminant - chemical, , radiological, biological, etc - relies on 3 concepts: time, distance, and shielding. Minimize your contact time with a chemical, radioactive source, or sick person...and that reduces your exposure. Stay farther away from a chemical, radioactive source, or sick person...and that reduces your exposure. Put something between you and a chemical, radioactive source, or sick person...and that reduces your exposure. Do all 3, and your exposure should be pretty damn small. Since it's hard to identify who is sick, your best two approaches are to maintain distance and shielding from pretty much everyone.

 

[dgibbons]

Eh, you really didn’t answer my question. There’s a reason law enforcement looks at motive as an early factor in an investigation. Usually where there’s no motive there’s no action.
What motive does Fauci have to “undermine himself”. What does he gain? We aren’t talking something big here either we are talking an estimated moving target that he moved what, 10%...based on new information? His change in temperature about masking up is easily explainable and had everything to do with availability of PPE for front line healthcare workers. Whether that’s the right strategy or not is certainly a matter of opinion, but it’s not hard to wrap your head around that reasoning.
You provided an example which cited Rubio as calling Fauci a liar. What credibility does Rubio have? He mocked the virus early and often, and was first in line to get vaccinated. He has zero credibility. FWIW I would have voted for Rubio. I considered him the best of all candidates in the primary’s. His motive for getting this message out is pretty clear and is all about gathering support for his political future.

Because he enjoys the spotlight? Wants to throw out another pitch at a baseball game? Wants to make people feel better? Wants to soothe panic? Has a perverse desire to control the population? Believes he knows better than you what is good for you? He's a Russian/Chinese/Iranian sleeper agent trying to undermine America? Maybe he's a dumbass? Wants to paint himself as a hero?

Ultimately why does it matter? He's clearly willing to lie if he sees fit. Yet, he's not a political appointee subject to dismissal by the President and is not an elected official.

"Bumping" the number up to 90 percent based on polling data is asinine. That's 28 percent. If measles was going to be the baseline, he's had that data since the beginning.

You're seizing on Rubio. I'm not. That's just what Google was pulling up because tweetstorms are cool, and the search terms were "Fauci vaccine level lie". Here's the CNN fact check for you. "There is some basis for Rubio's claim on Fauci's stance on herd immunity levels." Hard hitting stuff there.
BTW, the tell is “We have to be humble....”

Fact-checking Sen. Rubio's criticism of Dr. Fauci | CNN Politics

Just a week after Sen. Marco Rubio was criticized for getting the coronavirus vaccine ahead of some front-line workers, the Florida Republican is back in the hot seat for his comments accusing Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and others of...

www.cnn.com

 

[dgibbons]

Therein lies the problem.

Just like the herd immunity issue, mask wearing requires a critical mass to be truly effective. And it requires not just wearing, but properly wearing. I guarantee that wherever you live, you can go down to your nearest Costco and walk in the front door...and before you get to the back you'll see a half dozen people with it under their nose and a couple more that have pulled it under their chin. Then there's the people who pull it down to talk. I saw a woman the other day who took it off so she could sneeze.

Consider also the basic function of the mask - to trap exhaled particles at the source. No mask is going to keep virus particles out. They afford very little protection to the wearer. The idea is that the wearer's exhalations are reduced, thereby reducing the amount of virus-laden aerosol in the environment. So, it takes very few infected people not wearing masks - or wearing them improperly - to maintain spread among a population. And red state/blue state, red county/blue county be damned....there are people everywhere who refuse to wear them or don't wear them right.

Protection from any contaminant - chemical, , radiological, biological, etc - relies on 3 concepts: time, distance, and shielding. Minimize your contact time with a chemical, radioactive source, or sick person...and that reduces your exposure. Stay farther away from a chemical, radioactive source, or sick person...and that reduces your exposure. Put something between you and a chemical, radioactive source, or sick person...and that reduces your exposure. Do all 3, and your exposure should be pretty damn small. Since it's hard to identify who is sick, your best two approaches are to maintain distance and shielding from pretty much everyone.

You mean poorly fitting cloth masks that rarely get washed are not saving America?

 

[Observer11]

You're going to see a lot of this (IF it's reported)...

Lincoln County Sheriff says initial interest in getting vaccinated against COVID appears 'low' among first responders

DAVENPORT - On Monday, Sheriff Wade Magers reported that the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine has arrived in Lincoln County. Magers revealed that, out the vast majority of the roughly 300 emergency

www.ifiberone.com

Sheriff Wade is a good cat. Straight shooter. His kid was a decent high school ball player too.

 

[Coug90]

Because he enjoys the spotlight? Wants to throw out another pitch at a baseball game? Wants to make people feel better? Wants to soothe panic? Has a perverse desire to control the population? Believes he knows better than you what is good for you? He's a Russian/Chinese/Iranian sleeper agent trying to undermine America? Maybe he's a dumbass? Wants to paint himself as a hero?

Ultimately why does it matter? He's clearly willing to lie if he sees fit. Yet, he's not a political appointee subject to dismissal by the President and is not an elected official.

"Bumping" the number up to 90 percent based on polling data is asinine. That's 28 percent. If measles was going to be the baseline, he's had that data since the beginning.

You're seizing on Rubio. I'm not. That's just what Google was pulling up because tweetstorms are cool, and the search terms were "Fauci vaccine level lie". Here's the CNN fact check for you. "There is some basis for Rubio's claim on Fauci's stance on herd immunity levels." Hard hitting stuff there.
BTW, the tell is “We have to be humble....”

Fact-checking Sen. Rubio's criticism of Dr. Fauci | CNN Politics

Just a week after Sen. Marco Rubio was criticized for getting the coronavirus vaccine ahead of some front-line workers, the Florida Republican is back in the hot seat for his comments accusing Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and others of...

www.cnn.com

I guess it sorta matters because of your insistence that he’s a liar...which would indicate you think he has some personal gain/stake in his message to the public. Of your potential reasons above several of the possibilities would be narcissistic in nature. So in summary Dr Fauci is a serial liar because he’s a narcissist. Truly fascinating.

 

[dgibbons]

I guess it sorta matters because of your insistence that he’s a liar...which would indicate you think he has some personal gain/stake in his message to the public. Of your potential reasons above several of the possibilities would be narcissistic in nature. So in summary Dr Fauci is a serial liar because he’s a narcissist. Truly fascinating.

So if his motivations are pure as the driven snow, it's fine. I'm sure Trump would have appreciated that treatment.

Are you disputing that he's lied?

 

[425cougfan]

425, I apologize for any lack of clarity. I have two primary regrets, both of which we can improve on for the next 6 months. If I could ask for two things, these would be the things upon which we could improve. And it is still not too late to cut down on unnecessary deaths going forward, though we've fumbled some of this and cut a lot of lives short to this point that would not have been cut short with different behavior.

The first is people's unwillingness to postpone family gatherings; or skirt lockdown rules with business meetings...whether at holidays or any other occasion...and as a result have a concentrated group of people indoors for prolonged periods. Airborne exposure is primarily time, dose and density related. Masks cut dose and extend the time involved before exposure for a given people density in a confined space. If a bunch of folks are crowded into an elevator car, even with masks, no sneezes and no touching, exposure is a relatively quick thing. In a large room with only a few people it is a whole different ball game, and the likely time to exposure is much longer. Family gatherings that involve eating & drinking automatically mean no masks, at least during the meal(s). In cold weather these gatherings are typically indoors and of long duration. That is pouring gasoline on spread. Outdoors with distance; or in a barn-like structure without a lot of crowding; or in rooms specifically designed to avoid lateral airborne spread; is not too bad. Indoors for hours, especially with eating and drinking is a guarantee that if anyone shows up who is contagious, many more will be infected. This first item is within the direct control of us all. Yes, masks are important, but the context in which they are used is an even bigger deal.

The second is our lack of political leadership to this point (both parties). Churchill's blood, toil, tears and sweat speech (and his actions that followed) is a very good example of political leadership at a time of crisis. Britain at the time was hardly united, and there was a noisy fringe group that advocated simply giving up. Churchill had to rally the populace to a common purpose that would involve sacrifice. Regrettably, the closest we got to that kind of effort was from a couple of governors. Churchill was a man for his time. We had no such man. Without someone who was at least minimally truthful and competent at understanding the issue and rallying the populace, we ended up with a medical, scientific and engineering issue that became a political and religious football and a business catastrophe. This second issue is not within our direct control at the political level, so it makes visibly standing up for what is right and advocating what needs to be done on a personal level important (in a non-hypocritical way; if you are not willing to walk the talk yourself, then don't talk). The failure to walk the talk himself is what sunk Newsome in his efforts (one example). You can't condemn gatherings, then meet colleagues in a restaurant for hours in a small room if you want to maintain credibility. And without credibility, you can't lead.

Long story short, wear masks; avoid gatherings of folks that you don't live with regularly; stay out of confined situations that involve people density, unless the confined space was designed specifically for the purpose; don't be intimidated by those who don't wish to be inconvenienced; and recognize that our collective actions will either reduce or increase (up to us) the deaths in our community. It is pretty much that simple. Your chances of getting into an ICU in LA County right now if you need it are still pretty good if you can wait 12-24 hours. Until then you circle in your ambulance or lay on a gurney in the lobby. Ventilator availability is worse than that. This is no joke.

Thanks for laying all of this out. I get what you're saying, and couldn't agree more on small groups being a huge issue. Re political leadership, I am not sure any leader could have prevented this, per se, but certainly can imagine a leader inspiring the population to act in a more intelligent and unified way, which could have had some beneficial impacts. (That said, in our political environment, I think it virtually is impossible for anyone from either party to succeed in such an effort.) Wish you and yours well in getting through this.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

So, you're not doing an analysis of civil liberties in different countries? I suspect if you were being detained indefinitely in Australia for suspicion of a crime (that's suspicion not conviction), which is perfectly legal, I doubt you would consider it an open society. Since, you know, you couldn't leave. But sure, all western and developed societies are the same. Totally.

Actually, I did and was quite pleased to learn the vast similarities between Canadian an Australian rules of law regarding civil liberties and due process of their citizens. Even Japan would be familiar to Americans.

Since you bring up then unspecified case in Australia and purportedly are using it to disqualify Australia as an open society (where citizens are free to travel unrestricted , assemble peacefully and have free speech) then i guess the uSA is also disqualified because of a US citizen Jose Padilla being detained without charges being filed for over 3 years beginning in 2002. This is without detailing the numerous unarmed and innocent citizens killed by authorities in these good old state's throughout the years including very recently. Because if you, or someone close to you were the victim of these miscarriages of justice and violations of your or their civil rights you, also, might not feel you were in an "open" society, whatever the f**k that means, since you refuse to specify. Please explain the differences!

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

Dgibs...wtf?

It's most fascinating you claim you didn't vote for trump and wouldn't this year (an increasingly non-credible statement) and yet once again come for the defense of that a$$-hole with this gem, demeaning Fauci:

"Because he enjoys the spotlight? Wants to throw out another pitch at a baseball game? Wants to make people feel better? Wants to soothe panic? Has a perverse desire to control the population? Believes he knows better than you what is good for you? He's a Russian/Chinese/Iranian sleeper agent trying to undermine America? Maybe he's a dumbass? Wants to paint himself as a hero"

Imagine someone...anyone making your same complaint about a liar, let's say Trump, and then posting what you did above. Fits don't it? But all the misinformation, deflection and out right lying by trump and not a peep out of you. Very curious. Yes, yes of course Fauci is the real demon here, not the one who actually has the capacity to control national health policy during a pandemic and national emergency.

So, your doing Google searches for "Fauci vaccine never lie"? Again...Very interesting. That's all I have to say about that.

 

[CougEd]

So if his motivations are pure as the driven snow, it's fine. I'm sure Trump would have appreciated that treatment.

Are you disputing that he's lied?

We will be down to one case....yeah that is the guy I choose to trust.

Fauci said there would be a second wave. IT came. Said Thanksgiving would provide a surge. It has. We had a leader say open up the economy on Easter in celebration. Which person do I trust?

 

[Coug90]

So if his motivations are pure as the driven snow, it's fine. I'm sure Trump would have appreciated that treatment.

Are you disputing that he's lied?

Saying things you later backtrack on because of new information available isn’t lying. Let’s put it this way...Public companies make quarterly earning projections. Sometimes they miss projections. Sometimes by a lot. Does this mean they are lying? No, usually it means they misinterpreted the data they had available. Sometimes you have an Enron...intentionally cooking the books...that’s lying. Whatever inaccuracies I’ve heard from Fauci pretty clearly fall into the former category. There’s only one reason to characterize him as a liar and we all know what that reason is.

 

[dgibbons]

Dgibs...wtf?

It's most fascinating you claim you didn't vote for trump and wouldn't this year (an increasingly non-credible statement) and yet once again come for the defense of that a$$-hole with this gem, demeaning Fauci:

"Because he enjoys the spotlight? Wants to throw out another pitch at a baseball game? Wants to make people feel better? Wants to soothe panic? Has a perverse desire to control the population? Believes he knows better than you what is good for you? He's a Russian/Chinese/Iranian sleeper agent trying to undermine America? Maybe he's a dumbass? Wants to paint himself as a hero"

Imagine someone...anyone making your same complaint about a liar, let's say Trump, and then posting what you did above. Fits don't it? But all the misinformation, deflection and out right lying by trump and not a peep out of you. Very curious. Yes, yes of course Fauci is the real demon here, not the one who actually has the capacity to control national health policy during a pandemic and national emergency.

So, your doing Google searches for "Fauci vaccine never lie"? Again...Very interesting. That's all I have to say about that.

Your adherence to identity politics is showing again. I don’t think the anointed public health official should lie about public health. But if you’re fine with it, that’s your call. Undermining confidence in public health during a pandemic is an interesting choice.

If you want to search for news articles about someone lying, using that person’s name, lie and the subject are good places to start.

 

[dgibbons]

Saying things you later backtrack on because of new information available isn’t lying. Let’s put it this way...Public companies make quarterly earning projections. Sometimes they miss projections. Sometimes by a lot. Does this mean they are lying? No, usually it means they misinterpreted the data they had available. Sometimes you have an Enron...intentionally cooking the books...that’s lying. Whatever inaccuracies I’ve heard from Fauci pretty clearly fall into the former category. There’s only one reason to characterize him as a liar and we all know what that reason is.

Except he knew masks worked. He’s a public health official. He lied because of the PPE shortage. Do you dispute he lied about the vaccine numbers?

 

[dgibbons]

Actually, I did and was quite pleased to learn the vast similarities between Canadian an Australian rules of law regarding civil liberties and due process of their citizens. Even Japan would be familiar to Americans.

Since you bring up then unspecified case in Australia and purportedly are using it to disqualify Australia as an open society (where citizens are free to travel unrestricted , assemble peacefully and have free speech) then i guess the uSA is also disqualified because of a US citizen Jose Padilla being detained without charges being filed for over 3 years beginning in 2002. This is without detailing the numerous unarmed and innocent citizens killed by authorities in these good old state's throughout the years including very recently. Because if you, or someone close to you were the victim of these miscarriages of justice and violations of your or their civil rights you, also, might not feel you were in an "open" society, whatever the f**k that means, since you refuse to specify. Please explain the differences!

Go ahead and post your comparison. You’re obviously quite proud of what you learned. Those words indicate that you didn’t know about any of it before.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

Your adherence to identity politics is showing again. I don’t think the anointed public health official should lie about public health. But if you’re fine with it, that’s your call. Undermining confidence in public health during a pandemic is an interesting choice.

If you want to search for news articles about someone lying, using that person’s name, lie and the subject are good places to start.

In case you missed it earlier, i don't deny identity politics. You are the one trying to hide it.

Giving cover to a president who undermined confidence in public health departments and institutions during a pandemic is indeed an interesting choice by you.

Newsmax has been on the anti-Fauci train since at least May. Nice to see you"re fully on board now! Taihtsat

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

Go ahead and post your comparison. You’re obviously quite proud of what you learned. Those words indicate that you didn’t know about any of it before.

I was familiar enough to suspect all those countries would be considered by reasonable people to be "open". And, if by that you mean I am not an constitutional law expert of three foreign countries, EL-OH-EL... well, you got me there! And your assignment proves you didn't either.

Now go move those goal posts again to shield your claim that open societies can't control a highly contagious respiratory virus. Taihtsat

 

[dgibbons]

I was familiar enough to suspect all those countries would be considered by reasonable people to be "open". And, if by that you mean I am not an constitutional law expert of three foreign countries, EL-OH-EL... well, you got me there! And your assignment proves you didn't either.

Now go move those goal posts again to shield your claim that open societies can't control a highly contagious respiratory virus. Taihtsat

So, you lied. You didn’t do a comparison. You and Fauci will be the downfall of America.

 

[dgibbons]

In case you missed it earlier, i don't deny identity politics. You are the one trying to hide it.

Giving cover to a president who undermined confidence in public health departments and institutions during a pandemic is indeed an interesting choice by you.

Newsmax has been on the anti-Fauci train since at least May. Nice to see you"re fully on board now! Taihtsat

That was a reminder for you, not me. Watch the video. She's a progressive, so this is legit with identity politics and all. The Fauci part starts around 1:45. She covers your favorite president too.

 

[95coug]

Except he knew masks worked. He’s a public health official. He lied because of the PPE shortage. Do you dispute he lied about the vaccine numbers?

Remember the first 3 months of this pandemic when this was supposedly a contact virus, and it was all about cleaning surfaces? When you couldn’t find paper towels, Clorox wipes, disinfectants, and hand sanitizer? That’s when most “experts” were saying masks were unnecessary for regular people. It was sometime after that 3 month mark that it started becoming clear that this was incorrect...and recommendations changed. At this point, we’re almost 180 degrees from that - cleaning surfaces is next to meaningless, and masks and distancing are our best tools.

I think early on, there must have been assumptions that this virus moved more like colds and flu, and masking wasn’t really necessary. As we learned more, it became apparent that it’s much more infectious, which changed those assumptions.

The fact that he was wrong does not mean he lied.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

So, you lied. You didn’t do a comparison. You and Fauci will be the downfall of America.

d(newsmax)gibbons,
I did. It confirmed my assumptions. Follow?

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

That was a reminder for you, not me. Watch the video. She's a progressive, so this is legit with identity politics and all. The Fauci part starts around 1:45. She covers your favorite president too.

View embedded media

d(newsmax)gibbons

First, my favorite president is dead. (I think we all know whos favorite president she actually is talking about)

Did you ever play slowpitch softball? You must have been a pitcher! I love how these critics of Fauci show clips of his either in front of Congress on Feb 23 (you saw that on newsmax) or this one on March 8 (before American life changed with the NBA decision on March 11) qualifying his answers with "at this time" and "right now". And then as new information comes along, as a science professional, changes his assessment. Quite responsible actually.

Two points for you to answer
1. If everyone followed Fauci's (for the sake of argument) lies about herd immunity through vaccination, what would be the outcome? Would there be a benefit? A public health "good". Would businesses open more quickly? Would fewer people die, or more? What's most likely?
2. If everyone followed the lies of your favorite president, is there more likely to be benefit or a worse outcome to public health? Are more people likely to die or fewer?

If you want me to take a side and choose "a guy" in all this, I'll definitely take my guy Fauci. You can have trump. He's got blood on his hands. That's all I have to say about that.

 

[dgibbons]

Remember the first 3 months of this pandemic when this was supposedly a contact virus, and it was all about cleaning surfaces? When you couldn’t find paper towels, Clorox wipes, disinfectants, and hand sanitizer? That’s when most “experts” were saying masks were unnecessary for regular people. It was sometime after that 3 month mark that it started becoming clear that this was incorrect...and recommendations changed. At this point, we’re almost 180 degrees from that - cleaning surfaces is next to meaningless, and masks and distancing are our best tools.

I think early on, there must have been assumptions that this virus moved more like colds and flu, and masking wasn’t really necessary. As we learned more, it became apparent that it’s much more infectious, which changed those assumptions.

The fact that he was wrong does not mean he lied.

Remember that Trump's comments to Woodward about the virus being airborne were on February 7. Now, unless you think the Donald was conducting the studies or compiling the data and evidence that lead to that comment, and that Fauci was completely excluded from whatever evidence, briefing, etc. where Trump learned that, and that information about how the virus was spread was deliberately withheld from Fauci, that a pretty inconvenient fact.

The 60 Minutes interview was from March 8 I believe. Fauci was lying.

 

[dgibbons]

d(newsmax)gibbons,
I did. It confirmed my assumptions. Follow?

So post it.

 

[mikalalas]

I’m on Inslee’s side in all this, but if after the vaccine is widely used, and CFR falls below .1, and we make massive ground through spring and summer....if there are still restrictions I’ll be reaching over the isle to join the people who are prepping for civil war and mass constitutional lawsuits. We’ve done our part, and will continue through this winter and spring season. But if we can’t get back to normal by the summer/fall it’ll be about the time experiencing living outweighs fighting a battle that isn’t winnable.

So Inslee knows more then the WHO(World Health Organization), and the CDC(Centers of Disease Control), that both say that the INSLEE esque, like Lockdowns are not, is not needed, not effective, etc.

 

[dgibbons]

d(newsmax)gibbons

First, my favorite president is dead. (I think we all know whos favorite president she actually is talking about)

Did you ever play slowpitch softball? You must have been a pitcher! I love how these critics of Fauci show clips of his either in front of Congress on Feb 23 (you saw that on newsmax) or this one on March 8 (before American life changed with the NBA decision on March 11) qualifying his answers with "at this time" and "right now". And then as new information comes along, as a science professional, changes his assessment. Quite responsible actually.

Two points for you to answer
1. If everyone followed Fauci's (for the sake of argument) lies about herd immunity through vaccination, what would be the outcome? Would there be a benefit? A public health "good". Would businesses open more quickly? Would fewer people die, or more? What's most likely?
2. If everyone followed the lies of your favorite president, is there more likely to be benefit or a worse outcome to public health? Are more people likely to die or fewer?

If you want me to take a side and choose "a guy" in all this, I'll definitely take my guy Fauci. You can have trump. He's got blood on his hands. That's all I have to say about that.

Easy response. Trump's widely publicized comments to Woodward about the virus being airborne were on February 7. Timing is important.

Comparing Trump to Fauci is false equivalence.

What you're clearly failing to understand is the next round of policies on opening up the economy, and the level of vaccination, are going to be in Fauci's lap at least to some extent. What is the science behind raising the magic number on the percentage of people vaccinated to reach herd immunity? Apparently it's polling data on how comfortable people are in taking the vaccine. Besides people's lives being at stake, the economy is at stake too. Instead of case counts, hospitalizations and deaths, the metric is going to migrate to vaccination numbers.

 

[mikalalas]

OMG! You believe Inslee just gets thrill out of restricting business in this state? That he's doing it just for zero reason whatsoever? Staggering. Taihtsat

He doesnt do it to get a thrill. He does it because he truly, sincerely, honestly, wrongly, thinks, believes, that CONTROL is best for him, everyone else, that CONTROL is better then Freedom, Liberty, etc.

He also wrongly thinks he knows more then CDC, WHO that rightly say that lockdowns are bad, and that Inslee and others shouldnt do lockdowns.

Also he also is listening to the wrong advisers, who are advising him wrongly to do lockdowns.

Its all about control, when he doesnt lockdown rioters, protestors, and others that are spreading the virus, while he still lockdowns churches, the rest of us.

Its either about control or he is a total HYPOCRIT, or both.

 

[mikalalas]

Are you aware that covid has killed more Americans in a calender year (9 months, actually) than any single cause in our entire history (sans perhaps the Spanish flu). I'm tempted to ask you what "Q" is telling you to say about that. But i won't. Taihtsat

10 Million to 20 Million cases)I have said 10 million in past, but then you or another or both, responded that its 17 Million cases)(Which actually makes my point(10 Mill cases is 2.65 Mortality Rate, 17 Million cases is about 1.65% Mortality rate.)

So 17 Million cases.

300k Dead(unless thats outdated too, but still CLOSE ENOUGH.)

About a 1.65% Mortality rate.

FLU: about a 1.35% Mortality Rate.

Not saying Covid is nothing.

But its still not as bad as you, others exaggerate.

Flu, Covid are both semi comparable.

The biggest difference is Flu is not as contagious, and doesnt have as high as a infection rate.

Thats why Flu only has about 4 Million cases to Covid's 17 million cases, and about 50k to 100k dead to Covid's 300k dead

But the Mortality rates for both Covid, Flu are similar.

The real Problem of Covid is not the deaths, Mortality Rate.

The real problem is EXTREME HIGH, FAST INFECTION RATE, which can, does cause hospitals, resources, etc, to be overwhelmed.

Thats what flattening the curve was all about.

Thats why we need social distancing, even tho lockdowns are not needed.

Both those that say its nothing, and those like you who exxagerate Covid, both NEED TO STOP.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

So post it.

Answer my two questions above about fauci and trump.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

10 Million to 20 Million cases)I have said 10 million in past, but then you or another or both, responded that its 17 Million cases)(Which actually makes my point(10 Mill cases is 2.65 Mortality Rate, 17 Million cases is about 1.65% Mortality rate.)

So 17 Million cases.

300k Dead(unless thats outdated too, but still CLOSE ENOUGH.)

About a 1.65% Mortality rate.

FLU: about a 1.35% Mortality Rate.

Not saying Covid is nothing.

But its still not as bad as you, others exaggerate.

Flu, Covid are both semi comparable.

The biggest difference is Flu is not as contagious, and doesnt have as high as a infection rate.

Thats why Flu only has about 4 Million cases to Covid's 17 million cases, and about 50k to 100k dead to Covid's 300k dead

But the Mortality rates for both Covid, Flu are similar.

The real Problem of Covid is not the deaths, Mortality Rate.

The real problem is EXTREME HIGH, FAST INFECTION RATE, which can, does cause hospitals, resources, etc, to be overwhelmed.

Thats what flattening the curve was all about.

Thats why we need social distancing, even tho lockdowns are not needed.

Both those that say its nothing, and those like you who exxagerate Covid, both NEED TO STOP.
[/QUOTE
Dude, the flu doesn't have a mortality rate of 1.35%. It's 0.1% typically. Do the math. 2017-18 45 million cases, 61,000 deaths. 61,000 divided by 45 million is .135%. Covid is currently approximately 335,000 divided by 18.5 million - 1.8% which is about 13 times higher. While it probably really isn't that much higher due to underreported cases the actual death toll is about 5-6 times higher than a typical flu season. AND...still counting! AND, it isn't an either or. It's in addition to.

I don't really take issue with most of the rest of your post, which was kind of nice and short🤓

 

[mikalalas]

Let's see if I can accurately summarize your position: if it was up to you, you would lift all restrictions related to covid control and shoot for herd immunity. Correct?

No NOT ALL Restrictions.

Certainly 6 to 13 ft social distancing is REASONABLE.

Certainly, good hygiene, washing hands, etc, is reasonable

Certainly not coughing, sneezing, etc, on people is reasonable.

Certainly requiring mask in EXTREMELY HIGH covid infection, death areas(Not places like Lincoln County, WA(Pop 10,000, about 75 cases, about 1,2,3,4 deaths), is good.

Even semi limited lockdowns in places like NEW YORK, etc, with EXTREMELY high, covid infection, death rates, can be ok.

Its the ONE SIZE FITS ALL DRACONIAN, LOCKDOWN measures, by Inslee, Gov of CA that are bad.

Its so ridiculously bad in CA, that both Democrats, Repubs, others are either recalling the gov of CA, or at least trying to.

Also its the HYPOCRISY, letting protestors, corporations, big box stores, casinos, etc, do whatever they want, while the rest cant, are locked down.

Cant sing. Cant sing at church. Cant goto church. If can goto church, can only have 13 to 50+ at church while protestors, gamblers, etc, can gather, have thousands at their gathering.

FOUNDING FATHERS of George Washington, etc, are turning, rolling over in their graves at what Inslee, others are doing to our freedoms, Liberties, Constitution, etc, because of the EXXAGGERATION of Covid.

Covid is NOT NOTHING.

Covid is NOT what its being exxaggerated to supposedly be.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

Easy response. Trump's widely publicized comments to Woodward about the virus being airborne were on February 7. Timing is important.

***not as important as you think. Fauci doesn't make policy, trump does. Although trump didn't enact effective policy or leadership. He had more to do with outcomes than Fauci. Do you deny this?

Comparing Trump to Fauci is false equivalence.

***the comparison is on lying, the topic you are so hung up on with Fauci but you are not hung up on with trump. If not, why not? Not a false equivalency.

What you're clearly failing to understand is the next round of policies on opening up the economy, and the level of vaccination, are going to be in Fauci's lap at least to some extent. What is the science behind raising the magic number on the percentage of people vaccinated to reach herd immunity? Apparently it's polling data on how comfortable people are in taking the vaccine. Besides people's lives being at stake, the economy is at stake too. Instead of case counts, hospitalizations and deaths, the metric is going to migrate to vaccination numbers.

 

[dgibbons]

Answer my two questions above about fauci and trump.

You've been teasing your erstwhile analysis for days. Post it.

You can refer back to my previous post for my answer. The short answer is that do you really want Fauci to have a hand in reopening policy? Besides the fact that his advice is limited to public health (not economics, law or anything else), he's clearly willing to lie.

 

[dgibbons]

You've perfected the CougEd method of replying to posts, which impairs the ability to respond. Do you know that Trump will be out of office in less than a month, and Biden is retaining Fauci as chief medical adviser?

 

[CougEd]

So Inslee knows more then the WHO(World Health Organization), and the CDC(Centers of Disease Control), that both say that the INSLEE esque, like Lockdowns are not, is not needed, not effective, etc.

You tell me what is "effective" . I do know when New York and all other states were locked down in March through April the infection and transmitted rate was way down. You may argue that is too high a cost to pay. Fine. But it did work to get some control of it. But we in the US have short attention span.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

No NOT ALL Restrictions.

Certainly 6 to 13 ft social distancing is REASONABLE.

Certainly, good hygiene, washing hands, etc, is reasonable

Certainly not coughing, sneezing, etc, on people is reasonable.

Certainly requiring mask in EXTREMELY HIGH covid infection, death areas(Not places like Lincoln County, WA(Pop 10,000, about 75 cases, about 1,2,3,4 deaths), is good.

Even semi limited lockdowns in places like NEW YORK, etc, with EXTREMELY high, covid infection, death rates, can be ok.

Its the ONE SIZE FITS ALL DRACONIAN, LOCKDOWN measures, by Inslee, Gov of CA that are bad.

Its so ridiculously bad in CA, that both Democrats, Repubs, others are either recalling the gov of CA, or at least trying to.

Also its the HYPOCRISY, letting protestors, corporations, big box stores, casinos, etc, do whatever they want, while the rest cant, are locked down.

Cant sing. Cant sing at church. Cant goto church. If can goto church, can only have 13 to 50+ at church while protestors, gamblers, etc, can gather, have thousands at their gathering.

FOUNDING FATHERS of George Washington, etc, are turning, rolling over in their graves at what Inslee, others are doing to our freedoms, Liberties, Constitution, etc, because of the EXXAGGERATION of Covid.

Covid is NOT NOTHING.

Covid is NOT what its being exxaggerated to supposedly be.

Neat, that post you responded to wasn't directed at you. It was trying to figure out just what the hell Observer was advocating for. But observer ran off to go observe something else less challenging, I suppose.

The founder's likely are not doing any such thing if they could. They had to deal with small pox outbreaks and an almost yearly outbreak of yellow fever. During the revolutionary war quarantine were put in place, the whole government evacuated Philadelphia in 1793.

In 1796 Congress passed a quarantine/public health emergency law signed by Washington. Both Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905) and Gibbons v. Ogden 22 US 1 (1824) entrenched federal and state powers to enforce quarantines during health emergencies.

Also, the "founders" were hardly United on anything. That's all I have to say about that.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

You've been teasing your erstwhile analysis for days. Post it.

You can refer back to my previous post for my answer. The short answer is that do you really want Fauci to have a hand in reopening policy? Besides the fact that his advice is limited to public health (not economics, law or anything else), he's clearly willing to lie.

d(newsmax)gibbons

You haven't specifically answered my two queries - at all!

1. If everyone followed Fauci's (for the sake of argument) lies about herd immunity through vaccination, what would be the outcome? Would there be a benefit? A public health "good". Would businesses open more quickly? Would fewer people die, or more? What's most likely?
2. If everyone followed the lies of your favorite president*, is there more likely to be benefit or a worse outcome to public health? Are more people likely to die or fewer?

*so you don't worm out of this, I'm referring to trump specifically.

Once you've done that, I'll link to my sources. You sure you want to go down that road? Are you confident?

You seem reluctant to be on the wrong side of trump. Are you currently or planning on running for federal office?

 

[dgibbons]

d(newsmax)gibbons

You haven't specifically answered my two queries - at all!

1. If everyone followed Fauci's (for the sake of argument) lies about herd immunity through vaccination, what would be the outcome? Would there be a benefit? A public health "good". Would businesses open more quickly? Would fewer people die, or more? What's most likely?
2. If everyone followed the lies of your favorite president*, is there more likely to be benefit or a worse outcome to public health? Are more people likely to die or fewer?

*so you don't worm out of this, I'm referring to trump specifically.

Once you've done that, I'll link to my sources. You sure you want to go down that road? Are you confident?

You seem reluctant to be on the wrong side of trump. Are you currently or planning on running for federal office?

You first. That’s proper argumentation. Again, you’ve been teasing it for days. Cat got your tongue?

Your refusal to acknowledge that Fauci has repeatedly lied is very curious when it is clear that he has. So you rely on false equivalence. That’s not proper argumentation.

I post under my real name. So you can look up whether I’m running for federal office or not. Again, you may have missed it but Biden won the election. Why would I want to cozy up to the lame duck instead of the president elect?

 

[CougEd]

You first. That’s proper argumentation. Again, you’ve been teasing it for days. Cat got your tongue?

Your refusal to acknowledge that Fauci has repeatedly lied is very curious when it is clear that he has. So you rely on false equivalence. That’s not proper argumentation.

I post under my real name. So you can look up whether I’m running for federal office or not. Again, you may have missed it but Biden won the election. Why would I want to cozy up to the lame duck instead of the president elect?

Why did he "lie" about the mask? Yes -he didn't tell the truth about the mask. And moving numbers is not a lie.

 

[Observer11]

Neat, that post you responded to wasn't directed at you. It was trying to figure out just what the hell Observer was advocating for. But observer ran off to go observe something else less challenging, I suppose.

The founder's likely are not doing any such thing if they could. They had to deal with small pox outbreaks and an almost yearly outbreak of yellow fever. During the revolutionary war quarantine were put in place, the whole government evacuated Philadelphia in 1793.

In 1796 Congress passed a quarantine/public health emergency law signed by Washington. Both Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905) and Gibbons v. Ogden 22 US 1 (1824) entrenched federal and state powers to enforce quarantines during health emergencies.

Also, the "founders" were hardly United on anything. That's all I have to say about that.

You seem to have it all figured out. Lock down forevah!

Been observing dgibbons take you to school and back on the law and Fauci.